Tom Lane writes:
> Pete Forman wrote:
> > The basic problem is that is a BSD header. The
> > correct header for TCP internals such as TCP_NODELAY on a UNIX
> > system is . By UNIX I mean UNIX95 (aka XPG4v2 or SUSv1)
> > or later. The 2 files which conditionally include
> > need also to
Pete Forman writes:
> There is a separate problem running the configure script on AIX. It
> hangs while testing for flex. The two processes that I killed to
> allow configure to continue were
>
> /usr/ccs/bin/lex --version
> /usr/bin/lex --version
>
> The problem is that lex is waitin
Tom Lane writes:
> >> This is an IRIX bug but I think that we need to work around it.
>
> > Roger, will do.
>
> I have changed configure in the CVS repository to test for
> netinet/tcp.h per your recommendation. At your convenience, please
> verify that it really does do the right thing
Tom Lane writes:
> >> Actually, given your description of the problem, I'm half
> >> inclined to revert the whole patch and instead make configure's
> >> test for availability of first include
> >> , so that that configure test will succeed on IRIX
> >> etc.
>
> Pete,
> After looking a
Pete Forman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On IRIX 6.5.5m I get the following error. The header is
> included by (nearly!) all of the standard headers. It is the IRIX
> equivalent of config.h if you will.
> configure:4349: checking for netinet/tcp.h
> configure:4359: cc -E conftest.c >/dev/nu
>> This is an IRIX bug but I think that we need to work around it.
> Roger, will do.
I have changed configure in the CVS repository to test for netinet/tcp.h
per your recommendation. At your convenience, please verify that it
really does do the right thing on IRIX.
rega
Tom Lane writes:
> After looking at this I'm confused again. The configure test
> consists of seeing whether cpp will process
>
> #include
>
> without complaint. I can well believe that the full C compilation
> process will generate errors if is included without
> also including , b
>> Actually, given your description of the problem, I'm half inclined
>> to revert the whole patch and instead make configure's test for
>> availability of first include , so
>> that that configure test will succeed on IRIX etc.
Pete,
After looking at this I'm confused again. The configure te
xti.h portion of patch has been backed out.
> Pete Forman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I've done bit more research. was the correct place to find
> > TCP_NODELAY in UNIX98/SUSv2. However in the Austin Group draft of the
> > next version of POSIX and UNIX0x/SUSv3, XTI has been dropped and
>
Pete Forman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've done bit more research. was the correct place to find
> TCP_NODELAY in UNIX98/SUSv2. However in the Austin Group draft of the
> next version of POSIX and UNIX0x/SUSv3, XTI has been dropped and
> officially included.
OK, thanks for following up o
{retry of message sent Fri, 20 Oct 2000 14:04:16 +0100 (BST)]
Tom Lane writes:
> Pete Forman wrote:
> > The basic problem is that is a BSD header. The
> > correct header for TCP internals such as TCP_NODELAY on a UNIX
> > system is . By UNIX I mean UNIX95 (aka XPG4v2 or SUSv1)
> > or late
On my UnixWare Box, both xti.h and netinet/... are present.
(Arguably the ONE TRUE UNIX, decendant from the ATT sources, and all
that rot, and current highest SysVrX release, at SysV R5).
LER
* Bruce Momjian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001019 22:34]:
> > Pete Forman wrote:
> > > The basic problem is
> Pete Forman wrote:
> > The basic problem is that is a BSD header. The
> > correct header for TCP internals such as TCP_NODELAY on a UNIX system
> > is . By UNIX I mean UNIX95 (aka XPG4v2 or SUSv1) or later.
> > The 2 files which conditionally include need also to
> > conditionally include .
Pete Forman wrote:
> The basic problem is that is a BSD header. The
> correct header for TCP internals such as TCP_NODELAY on a UNIX system
> is . By UNIX I mean UNIX95 (aka XPG4v2 or SUSv1) or later.
> The 2 files which conditionally include need also to
> conditionally include .
This patch
14 matches
Mail list logo
